I expect most people to say the VDSL2 figures are pessimistic, they are meant to be, to thus ensure we are not overstating coverage, and this is important as take-up increases and cross-talk increases.

I also know from looking at speed test results visitors to thinkbroadband get higher speeds than others generally, suggesting that others are more likely to be on the impacted type figures, and when I manually double check samples we aim to be at the low end of impacted.

Without knowing where you actually are hard to say much beyond a pessimistic view on crosstalk and assumption of high take-up means the majority should easily do better than the chart suggests

This also makes the average higher on Huawei more impressive as early commercial ECI type areas were the dense urban ones where a lot of the time everyone was in a superfast distance.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

They are amendment 2 i.e. what is being deployed

Have BT actually said they are using amendment 2?

All the trial results seem to pre-date the power increases (ie amendment 2), and seem consistent with amendment 1 instead.

Granted the publicly-available speed results are relatively old; BT will have newer figures that they don't seem to want to make public.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Without knowing where you actually are hard to say much beyond a pessimistic view on crosstalk and assumption of high take-up means the majority should easily do better than the chart suggests

Fair enough. Do you think the 17db = 800m is a nearly accurate figure? Just out of interest.

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

The tables say - or suggest ? - 17db mean I must have an 800m line length and my speeds would be 28 down and 10 up.

I don't know about @MrSaffron's tables, but I've had a few lines, with different modems.

A 650m line that would have reached around 55-60Mbps. Unfortunately, the firmware didn't report the attenuation.

A 375m line which dropped from 90/25 to 78/24 over 3 years. Attenuation was 16.5dB. There is a chance it was thicker copper and would have relatively lower attenuation, acting like 300m of standard copper.

A 100m line which has been anywhere from 95/30-107/35 over 3 years. Attenuation is 8.5dB, but this is likely to be thinner copper, so behaving more like a 150m line.

But ... some modems seem to choose different ways of reporting attenuation.

I would suggest over-pessimistic.

I have seen my speeds drop quite a bit over time as more residents come on line, however, I would guess that of the properties served by the multi-pair cable from the cabinet there is a 90% take-up so very little chance of much more cross talk.

Would need to sit down and do lots more checking if I was to use the word accurate, and busy with other daily stuff that keeps me going for a few hours

I've seen tests on lines and as sample increases will tweak accordingly, so its based on what we've seen in the last few months rather than say 2015 presentations

the original intention of g.fast was supposed to be nodes installed closer to the home so rolled out "alongside" more fibre, but BT have turned this on its head and are now using it akin to what adsl2+ was vs adsl, currently aft the FTTC cabinet locations so it boosts the shortest lines only.

When BT have saturated this method of deployment its possible they will start using remote nodes or they may use an alternative tech such as FTTP for the longer lines.